BURGESS Model

Urban Land Use Model

Chicago in
1920s
 Concentric model

•  It was put forward by Ernest W. Burgess (sociologist)

and his associates in 1920s.

•  It was based on empirical research in a number of

American cities, like Chicago.

•  Main ideas of the model:

Ecological Residential
Spatial pattern
approach to segregation +
of various land
explain land Social
use zones
use pattern segregation
ECOLOGICAL Concepts
of the model
•  Burgess adopted the concepts used by plant
ecologists (ideas of competition, dominance,
invasion and succession)
•  within the city, people competes for limited
space (COMPETITION)
•  those who are best able to pay
(DOMINANCE) achieve the most desirable
locations (INVASION and SUCCESSION).
•  those individuals and functions with the lowest
level of economic competence have the least
choice, occupying the poorest locations.
How did Burgess explain
land uses in Chicago?
•  The CBD, the most accessible location attracted all sorts of commercial
activities
•  Shortage of land induced keen competition
•  The location was dominated by those activities with high rental
capacity
 How did Burgess explain land
uses in Chicago?
•  This is caused by growth of city economy & arrival of new
migrants to the city.
•  As the city grew, the CBD would exert pressure on the zone
immediately surrounding it i.e. the zone of transition
•  Outward expansion of the CBD would invade nearby residential
areas causing them to expand outwards. (Centrifugal movement)
 How did Burgess explain
land uses in Chicago?
l The process was thought to continue with each successive
neighbourhood moving further from the CBD.
l New immigrants would move into the cheapest residential areas
of the city. When they became economically established, they
would migrate outwards.
l Thus lower residential class moved to adjacent neighbourhoods
and more affluent residents moved further outwards.
 Bid-rent
mechanism APPLIES
•  land value decreases with increasing distance.

•  the highest land value is at the city centre because of

keenest competition.
 functional zoning and
residential segregation
•  = within different areas of the city, different single functions
formed the dominant element.
Concentric Model
C.B.D.
Transition Zone
Low class
residential
Middle class
residential
Commuter’s
zone
 CBD
•  at the heart of the city

•  forms the commercial, social and cultural hub.

•  the most accessible, at the focus of urban transport network

•  Major retail outlets, e.g. department stores, specialist shops, flagstores

•  A high proportion of the city’s main offices

•  The tallest buildings in the city due to high rents resulting from keen competition

•  Greatest number and concentration of pedestrians

•  Greatest volume and concentration of traffic

•  Represents the highest land value

•  Many old office buildings are demolished and rebuilt.

Chicago’s
inner city
“slums”
1920s

Chicago’s
Gold Coast
1930s
 Zone in transition
•  Surrounds the CBD
•  an area of ‘blight’, also called the twilight zone.
•  An area of mixed land uses – wholesale, light
manufacturing, residential
•  Provides cheap housing for each new immigrant
wave
•  the zone often characterized by slums, immigrant
ghettoes, unstable and low social groups and crime.
•  poorest residential areas.
 Zone of workingmen’s
homes
•  surrounds the transition zone
•  has some of the older, often terraced housing
areas of the city
•  occupied by workers who have left the transition
zone but who still require ready access to their
places of work in the inner zone. They left
transition zone because they want better living
conditions.
•  2nd generation immigrants form an important
element of the pop. in this zone.
Zone of better residence
(middle-class housing)
•  usually single-family dwellings in semi-detached or
detached houses

•  also some light industry in this zone, often in

industrial estates.
 Commuter Zone
•  lies beyond the continuous built-up area of the town,
at the fringe of the urban area.
•  consists of discontinuous urban settlement
interspersed with recreational facilities, woodland,
pastures.
•  is the zone of high class residential properties
where people can afford the high costs of
commuting.
 Discussion

•  Can you apply the ecological concepts suggested by

Burgess to explain the land use changes in Hong Kong?
 Socio-economic
characteristics
wealth

Social Income
status
Education level

occupation
Socio-economic People of different races
characteristics Ethnics
Majorities vs minorities

Family size
Family
Family Age
structure
composition
Sex
 Socio-economic
status
Near city centre
People of lower socio-
economic status usually have
lower income due to lower skills
and poorer education so they
occupy some less favourable
sites, e.g. the slums in the inner
city or squatter areas at the
edge of the inner city
Towards the periphery
People of higher socio-economic
status usually have higher income
(more affluent) due to more
professional occupation and their
higher educational background.
as they look for better living
environment and higher quality
of life.

Conclusion: Positive correlation between socio-economic status of

households with distance from the CBD.
 Reference

•  http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hong_kong_statistics/
dashboard/index_en_2006.html
 Situation in HK
•  Districts with the highest monthly domestic household income: Wan
Chai ($27,500), Central & Western ($26,250)

•  Districts with the lowest monthly domestic household income: Sham

Shui Po ($13,500), Kwun Tong ($14,050), Yuen Long ($14,810)

•  Some deviations from what Burgess suggested

•  Cluster of high-income and middle-income group near CBD due to

higher altitude / better sea view, e.g. Mid-levels

•  Though some low-income groups still cluster in old urban area like old
Wan Chai, Sheung Wan, Sai Ying Pun, Kwun Tong

•  Low-income group in outskirts of the city / new towns due to

government planning / cluster of low-income public housing estates in
Tin Shui Wai, Tuen Mun and Yuen Long
 Ethnic groups in a
city
•  Ethnic groups are new immigrants from other foreign countries,
e.g. the Chinese, the Italians, the Japanese in some US cities

•  Ethnic groups tend to cluster toegther as:

•  They can cooperate, unite together or defend themselves when
encounter any problems in the neighbourhood
•  They can feel less isolated from the city in order to integrate
themselves into the community

•  They usually have lower social status / bargaining power to

compete for a favourable site à occupy the inner city areas

•  Examples: China town (Leicester Square) in London, Little Sicily

in Chicago
 Social impacts of
influx of migrants
•  Positive impacts
•  Increase the variety of traditions,
art forms, musical genres, religious
symbols and centres of worships,
cuisins, restaurants and
architectural styles
•  Older, more established migrant
communities create a welcoming
base for new but similar migrants,
enabling easier assimilation
•  Hybrid cultures emerge, often
creating new art forms, food or
other cultural products
•  Increase social diversity
•  Some migrants are not integrated to
community à segregated societies
•  New waves of first-generation
immigrants may suffer poor living
condition
•  Tension between different ethnic
groups occurs
•  Social conflicts may spread to
whole society
•  For some first / second generation
migrants, their sense of traditional
homeland culture becomes more
diluted.
 Family structure
Near city centre Far away from city centre
(Peripheral areas)

Family size Small families occupy Big families as they need

less space as they can more space for children
afford the small flats so they look for larger
near city centre space of lower land rent

Family average age Old people usually have Young family have
lower mobility higher mobility
Family structure Young professional
(yuppies) lives close to
city centre to look for
entertainment, e.g. rise
of Soho District
 Family median age /
structure / size in hk
•  Districts with the highest percentage of old people (>65): Wong Tai
Sin (17.8%) & Sham Shui Po (16.7%)

•  Districts with the lowest percentage of old people (>65): Sai Kung
(8.2%) & Yuen Long (8.3%)

•  Old people have lower mobility and tend to settle near the old urban
area while new town development attracts young families to settle.

•  Districts with the smallest household size: Central & Western + Wan
Chai (2.7)

•  Districts with the largest household size: Southern District (3.2),

Yuen Long, North, Tai Po, Shatin, Sai Kung Districts (3.1)

•  Smaller household size in inner city while larger household size

towards the periphery of the city
 Early stage of
urbanization

•  People tended to reside near the CBD to minimize the

distance travelled so as the transport cost
 suburbanization

•  As real incomes have risen and better •  Occupied by wealthier people who
transportation has increased mobility,
this allows the separation of home and could afford the higher transport cost
workplaces. when moving out of the city centre.

•  Wealthy people moved out of the inner •  Wealthy people can occupy larger
city which was later Invaded by poorer amount of cheaper residential land on
ethnic minorities due to rising the periphery where they live in
immigrants to the city. detached dwellings and pay the high
commuting costs to city centre.
•  To offset high land value in these near-
city locations, they use only small
amount of land by living in high density
apartments which make maximum use
of expensive land.
 Results of
suburbanization
•  social segregation = creating particular groups or
classes which segregate themselves from other
groups.
•  poor people living close to the city centre on high
value land, while more wealthy people live on the
periphery where land is generally cheaper.
•  As reflected by the quality of housing
•  different in life styles + quality of life, income
and social status
 Weaknesses of
burgess model
•  Concentric zones are not homogenous but
heterogeneous

•  therefore, they are not distinctive and inevitably

distorted by major transport axes and topography
features.
 Criticisms

•  Limited universality: it is limited “to a particular

situation, at a particular time in a particular
country” (Carter, 1976)

•  The setting of the model was based on a particular

historical & cultural context.

•  It is most relevant to American cities in the 1920s but is

less relevant to other times and other cities especially in
ELDCs.
 Criticisms
•  The decline of the CBD •  it has allowed many
and the emergence of centres of employment to
suburban business centres grow outside the CBD due
to increased mobility
•  Increasing level of public
intervention •  large plots of land are only
available in the urban
•  Transport innovation fringe, thus lower class
residential areas are found
in the outer zone due to
inefficient transport.
•  It enables low class
residents to move away
from their place of work.
 Criticisms

•  Use for understanding residential pattern better than

commercial and industrial land uses
 Contributions
•  It was the first attempt to analyse the internal
morphology of town
•  Burgess model has invaluable contribution for
residential land use of a city. It suggests a process of
urban growth that might give rise to these.
•  It provides a good conceptual framework for more
detailed study of the complex urban land use.